Page:The American Cyclopædia (1879) Volume X.djvu/197

 LATIN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE 191 tions of corrupted texts. He found a worthy collaborator in Casaubon, whose translations and editions are executed with masterly schol- arship and care. During the 17th century the number of truly learned philologists decreased in France. Petavius was one of the most emi- nent. Diplomacy abandoned the use of Latin and substituted French. The practical and fashionable interest being thus on the wane, even scholars acquired little more than a sort of amateur mastery of Latin classics. This is rendered evident especially by the unskilful manner in which the Delphin edition of Latin classics was continued after the death of Huet, its originator. Germany was not as forward in Latin philology as France during the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries. The first. endeav- ors were tainted too much with the spirit of scholasticism to be of lasting value. Dalberg, Pirkheimer, and Peutinger labored to diffuse the knowledge of Latin, and caused the publi- cation of several texts. But a more perma- nent influence was exercised by Hegius, Wim- pheling, Bebel, and Locher, whose chief at- tention was directed to grammatical and rhe- torical instruction. Reuchlin's labors were the most effective. He brought Latin plays of his own composition, represented by stu- dents of Heidelberg, before German audiences, besides translating several Greek authors into Latin. He was instrumental also in drawing popular interest to classical studies through the disputations which were carried on against him by the clergy on account of his leaning toward Roman antiquities. Htitten and Von dem Busche, who were also in the midst of these discussions, were instrumental in promo- ting classical tastes. The first grammars and other elementary works printed in Germany were not equal, either in learning or in typo- graphical execution, to similar works issued from the Italian press, and it was difficult to find pupils who cared to learn the classic Latin instead of that of the scholastic institutions. The works of the fathers of the church, and several books on history, received more care on the part of the editors and printers. Me- lanchthon was of great importance as a Latin grammarian and teacher. He was at the head of the Philippici, which school numbered Neander, Fabricius, and Wolf as disciples. The thirty years' war uprooted the seed so carefully sown. The old Latin barbarisms sprang up again, and hardly before the middle of the 18th century were serious attempts made at arresting the progress of the decay of the Latin language as it appeared in print and was uttered in chairs and chancels. The Neth- erlands in the mean time afforded the safest asylum for Latin studies. While in other countries a certain dilettantism was observable in many productions of the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, Holland introduced a method into Latin philology, and gave it a scientific basis on which it continued till modern times. Erasmus wrote excellent Latin, without falling 480 VOL. x. 13 into the mannerism of the Ciceronians. In the latter half of the 16th century the labors of Jus- tus Lipsius, and the influence exercised by the newly founded university of Ley den, were aid- ed by the excellent work of great typogra- phers. Scaliger also went to Holland, and he and Grotius, Vossius, the family Heinsius, and Gronovius succeeded in laying before the world the best editions which had appeared. Grasvius, Burmann, Perizonius, Drakenborch, Oudendorp, and Ducker, whose researches reach to the latter half of the 18th i century, were the master critics of their age, and gave their country the foremost position in Latin philology. England produced a man who ex- tricated the Latin studies from the errors of treatment into which the scholars of other countries had fallen. Richard Bentley was the father of the science of verbal criticism. His Horace was a masterpiece of erudition and critical penetration ; it laid down a method of philological treatment not thought of before. Markland's skeptical and plodding criticism followed the same vein. Germany soon re- covered from the consequences of the refor- mation and the thirty years' war, and combi- ning the best of the efforts of England and Holland, she stood in the middle of the 18th century on a level with them. Ernesti put a check to the tendency toward hiding the value of the authors commented upon behind accu- mulations of trifling learning and personal opinions. Heyne searched for the sources of texts and various readings, and was also the means of clearing away much rubbish. His edition of Virgil was deservedly a model of philological work for the next decades. Then came F. A. Wolf, whose aesthetic spirit and deli- cate penetration laid the foundation for a more elevated treatment of the Latin authors. At the end of the last century there was almost a jealous competition among scholars in publish- ing so-called critical editions, and a large quan- tity of previously unused material was put into circulation. The critical apparatus of ancient manuscripts and early editions thus became more trustworthy and complete. The tradi- tional errors began to disappear, and Madvig's Cicero and Lachmann's editions of several poets were excellent attempts at reaching au- thentic texts. The labors of the present century have resulted in an almost total reconstruction of the works of the most favorite Latin au- thors. The rise of historical and juristic stu- dies, with Niebuhr in the van, furthered the elucidation of many obscure and neglected passages, greatly facilitating the understanding of ancient Latin works. The Germans now hold indisputably the foremost place in Latin studies, and their labors form the basis of most of the books on Latin published in other countries. The most eminent German scholars, with the special fields in which their works are now the chief authorities, are : on the relation which Latin holds to Greek, Ross ; on the his- tory of the Latin language while a living